Hearing delayed in suit over Addison recycling plant death

Tuesday

May 13, 2014 at 3:00 PM

By Dennis PelhamDaily Telegram Staff Writer

An initial hearing on a lawsuit over the 2012 death of an employee at a plastic recycling facility in Addison was adjourned a second time on Monday. It was re-scheduled for June 30 in Lenawee County Circuit Court.

The family of Hector Fermin Campos is claiming Next Specialty Resins deliberately put Campos in danger by making him work on a machine known to be unsafe. An attorney for the company denied the claim, and asserted defenses that include “alleged intentional or alleged criminal acts of third parties.”

Michigan State Police at the Monroe post still have an open investigation of the July 25, 2012, death. The body of the 27-year-old Adrian man was found that day in a machine that grinds large plastic automotive parts for recycling.

“We are still working on the investigation,” said post commander Lt. Tony Cuevas on Monday.

“It’s a difficult case because there are no eyewitnesses,” he said. Detectives have interviewed engineers from the company that manufactured the grinder as well as a person who maintained the machine.

An employee who was last known to be with Campos has also been questioned as have other workers at the facility, Cuevas said.

An accident investigation summary posted on the federal Occupational Safety & Health Administration website did not give a conclusion to the cause of the death. It did state Campos and a co-worker had argued earlier.

“Other employee interviews determined that employee #1 (Campos) and the co-worker walked up to the conveyor system to remove stuck parts from the hopper,” the summary stated.

OSHA reports say the company was cited for six “serious” violations and five other violations that were settled in October 2012.

A pre-trial statement filed April 28 by an attorney for the Campos family said Next Specialty Resins failed to properly train or certify workers on proper use of the equipment.

“Defendant also failed to provide proper supervision and oversight to ensure a safe work environment which included in and around extremely dangerous machinery,” attorney Robert Heston stated.

“At the time of plaintiff’s death, the defendants knew the machinery was malfunctioning and/or was not being used properly, yet failed to take the necessary steps to fix or correct the issues,” he stated.

A statement filed May 5 by company attorney John McSorley stated the suit is barred by the Michigan’s Worker Compensation Act. He stated there is no evidence to warrant an “intentional act exception” to allow a lawsuit. The company has “no legal liability for the intentional or criminal acts or for the alleged intentional or alleged criminal acts of third parties,” he also stated in earlier documents.

Heston claimed there is an intentional act exception in this case because company officials knew of “extremely dangerous” conditions “making injury certain to occur.”